Central Excise vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd. (2005)\n188 ELT 467 (SC)\n• Aspinwall & Co. Ltd. v. CIT

17 SCC 385Reported decision2008#13572 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2(29BA)Section 250(4)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80-ICSection 131Section 148

Issues it is cited on

section 2(29ba)section 80icsection 250(4)section 80ireason to believesection 271(1)section 131reassessment proceedingssection 271section 271(1)(c)section 27section 80

Judgments citing Central Excise vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd. (2005)\n188 ELT 467 (SC)\n• Aspinwall & Co. Ltd. v. CIT

Daxen Agritech India Pvt. Ltd., Baddi vs. ACIT, Circle, Parwanoo

In the result, all the above appeals of the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 473/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jul 2025AY 2018-19
For Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80

…r the definition provided in various statutes and judicial interpretations including: • Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd. (2005) 188 ELT 467 (SC) • Aspinwall & Co. Ltd. v. CIT [2001] 251 ITR 323 (SC) • India Cine Agencies v. CIT [2008] 17 SCC 385 • Arihant Tiles & Marbles v. ITO [2010] 320 ITR 79 (SC) 7.5 On the basis of the above said submission it was submitted that the appeal of the assessee is required to be allowed. 8. Per contra, the Ld. DR supported the findings of the AO and CIT(A), submitting that the assessee was merely filling pre-processed mushroom powder into capsules with no…

Daxen Agritech India Pvt. Ltd., Baddi vs. ACIT, Circle, Parwanoo

In the result, all the above appeals of the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 472/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Aman Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80

…der the definition provided in various statutes and judicial interpretations including: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd. (2005)  188 ELT 467 (SC) Aspinwall & Co. Ltd. v. CIT [2001] 251 ITR 323 (SC)  India Cine Agencies v. CIT [2008] 17 SCC 385  Arihant Tiles & Marbles v. ITO [2010] 320 ITR 79 (SC)  7.5 On the basis of the above said submission it was submitted that the appeal of the assessee is required to be allowed. 8. Per contra, the Ld. DR supported the findings of the AO and CIT(A), submitting that the assessee was merely filling pre-processed mushroom powder into capsules with…

Daxen Agritech India Pvt. Ltd., Baddi vs. ACIT, Circle, Parwanoo

In the result, all the above appeals of the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 471/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Aman Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80

…der the definition provided in various statutes and judicial interpretations including: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd. (2005)  188 ELT 467 (SC) Aspinwall & Co. Ltd. v. CIT [2001] 251 ITR 323 (SC)  India Cine Agencies v. CIT [2008] 17 SCC 385  Arihant Tiles & Marbles v. ITO [2010] 320 ITR 79 (SC)  7.5 On the basis of the above said submission it was submitted that the appeal of the assessee is required to be allowed. 8. Per contra, the Ld. DR supported the findings of the AO and CIT(A), submitting that the assessee was merely filling pre-processed mushroom powder into capsules with…

Daxen Agritech India Pvt. Ltd., Baddi vs. ACIT, Circle, Parwanoo

In the result, all the above appeals of the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 470/CHANDI/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jul 2025AY 2015-16
For Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80

…r the definition provided in various statutes and judicial interpretations including: • Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd. (2005) 188 ELT 467 (SC) • Aspinwall & Co. Ltd. v. CIT [2001] 251 ITR 323 (SC) • India Cine Agencies v. CIT [2008] 17 SCC 385 • Arihant Tiles & Marbles v. ITO [2010] 320 ITR 79 (SC) 7.5 On the basis of the above said submission it was submitted that the appeal of the assessee is required to be allowed. 8. Per contra, the Ld. DR supported the findings of the AO and CIT(A), submitting that the assessee was merely filling pre-processed mushroom powder into capsules with no…

Daxen Agritech India Pvt. Ltd., Baddi vs. ACIT, Circle, Parwanoo

In the result, all the above appeals of the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 469/CHANDI/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jul 2025AY 2014-15
For Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80

…r the definition provided in various statutes and judicial interpretations including: • Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd. (2005) 188 ELT 467 (SC) • Aspinwall & Co. Ltd. v. CIT [2001] 251 ITR 323 (SC) • India Cine Agencies v. CIT [2008] 17 SCC 385 • Arihant Tiles & Marbles v. ITO [2010] 320 ITR 79 (SC) 7.5 On the basis of the above said submission it was submitted that the appeal of the assessee is required to be allowed. 8. Per contra, the Ld. DR supported the findings of the AO and CIT(A), submitting that the assessee was merely filling pre-processed mushroom powder into capsules with no…

Daxen Agritech India Pvt. Ltd., Baddi vs. ACIT, Circle, Parwanoo

In the result, all the above appeals of the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 468/CHANDI/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Aman Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80

…der the definition provided in various statutes and judicial interpretations including: Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd. (2005)  188 ELT 467 (SC) Aspinwall & Co. Ltd. v. CIT [2001] 251 ITR 323 (SC)  India Cine Agencies v. CIT [2008] 17 SCC 385  Arihant Tiles & Marbles v. ITO [2010] 320 ITR 79 (SC)  7.5 On the basis of the above said submission it was submitted that the appeal of the assessee is required to be allowed. 8. Per contra, the Ld. DR supported the findings of the AO and CIT(A), submitting that the assessee was merely filling pre-processed mushroom powder into capsules with…

Daxen Agritech India Pvt. Ltd., Baddi vs. ACIT, Circle, Parwanoo

In the result, all the above appeals of the Assessee are dismissed

ITA 467/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Jul 2025AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Aman Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Geetinder Mann, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80

…r the definition provided in various statutes and judicial interpretations including: • Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd. (2005) 188 ELT 467 (SC) • Aspinwall & Co. Ltd. v. CIT [2001] 251 ITR 323 (SC) • India Cine Agencies v. CIT [2008] 17 SCC 385 • Arihant Tiles & Marbles v. ITO [2010] 320 ITR 79 (SC) 7.5 On the basis of the above said submission it was submitted that the appeal of the assessee is required to be allowed. 8. Per contra, the Ld. DR supported the findings of the AO and CIT(A), submitting that the assessee was merely filling pre-processed mushroom powder into capsules with no…

Central Excise vs. Johnson & Johnson Ltd. (2005)\n188 ELT 467 (SC)\n• Aspinwall & Co. Ltd. v. CIT (17 SCC 385) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax